"Resolved and ordered, That this association now declares its opposition to the enactment of S. 1417, known as the "Guffey bill", and hereby authorizes the president of the association to appoint at least three members of the association to take such steps and actions as it may deem advisable and expedient to oppose said bill and to act in cooperation with other group or groups in opposition to said bill."

CONCLUSION

As we stated at the beginning of this argument, this association is forced to the conclusion that the proposed Guffey bill is in many particulars unworkable, uneconomic and unsound, and particularly unfortunate in establishing rigid and inflexible provisions for the regulation of the industry at a time, when flexibility is absolutely requisite. It should not be inferred from this that membership in the association desires to return to the situation which existed in the industry in 1932 and for some years prior thereto. On the contrary, the association endorses wholeheartedly the suggestion of the National Coal Association and of the President of the United States for a continuation of the National Industrial Recovery Act for a period of 2 years with such strengthening amendments as Congress may deem advisable. Some of such amendments have been suggested by the National Coal Association and meet with our thorough endorsement. Others will doubtless be suggested by Members of Congress or officials of the administration.

Pessimists say that enforcement of the coal code is becoming increasingly difficult and that the code will inevitably break down. Very little serious attempt has been made to enforce the provisions of the code against violators thereof.

If the Congress will reenact the National Industrial Recovery Act, with strengthening provisions for its enforcement, for an additional period of 2 years, and thereupon the administration then announces that, whatever may be the case with respect to past offenses, it will prosecute vigorously offenses committed hereafter, compliance and enforcement will be vastly improved.

It is, therefore, most earnestly urged that the proposed Guffey bill be defeated and that the National Industrial Recovery Act be extended for an additional 2 year period, during which time the industry, should be able to decide upon the kind of regulation that will be most desirable for the long future. Respectfully submitted.

NORTHERN WEST VIRGINIA SUBDIVISIONAL COAL ASSOCIATION, By BROOKS FLEMING, Jr., President.

T. E. JOHNSON, Secretary.

Mr. MURRAY. Mr. Chairman, may I be permitted to offer a suggestion that might be most helpful and informative to the committee? Senator NEELY. Surely the committee would be glad to have anything that would be helpful.

Mr. MURRAY. It has been suggested during the course of these hearings by the proponents of the Guffey bill, that the underlying structure of the price-fixing provisions of the code were in constant jeopardy; and that the resultant effects of this situation might create an industrial catastrophe of Nation-wide proportions.

For the past week the marketing committee of the Appalachian coal fields has been presenting testimony to the board of arbitration created under the code, for the purpose of arriving at an understanding that might temporarily maintain the price structure in the competitive area comprising the Appalachian coal fields.

The discussion concerning this matter revolves itself around the resolution which has been presented to that board, a copy of which I have in my possession here, and which I would like to give to the chairman of the committee.

Senator NEELY. Will you read the resolution, if you have it there, Mr. Murray?

Mr. MURRAY. This resolution has been offered the board of arbitration for its approval by the six marketing experts controlling the destinies of price fixing under our present code.

Senator NEELY. Could you name those six experts?

Mr. MURRAY. I cannot just now. I can put their names into the record.

Senator NEELY. Do they represent the coal business throughout the United States or in some particular locality?

Mr. MURRAY. They represent the Appalachian coal district, which constitutes 72 percent of the industry.

Senator NEELY. Who are some of the prominent members of the board of arbitration to which this resolution has been submitted?

Mr. MURRAY. The chairman of the board of arbitration is Mr. Godfrey M. S. Tait, who was associated with the Coal Division of N. R. A., and is now presiding over meetings which are being conducted today and all the week at the Shoreham Hotel. The resolution is as follows:

MARCH 1, 1935.

Resolved, That any producer under this Subdivisional Code Authority's jurisdiction who can show that any other producer, agent, or wholesaler is offering a coal, other than railway locomotive fuel, at less than the established code price for said coal on a lot of business which he is now supplying at a legitimate price, and that said producer is filing statistical data as required by amendment no. 4 of the code, proving his assertion that he is supplying the coal, may be issued a permit to make reduction from the fair minimum market price so as to retain the particular lot of business. Such permit, when issued, shall show the account, tonnage, and price of the producer receiving such relief, and there shall be published in the Code Authority Bulletin, at once, the name and address of the account and the name of the producer and number of the permit so issued.

Senator NEELY. If the chairman of the subcommittee understands that resolution, its naked purpose is to destroy or impair the price structure established by the Code Authority. Is that correct? Mr. MURRAY. Unquestionably, Mr. Chairman.

Senator NEELY. Do you mean to say that any coal operator favors the adoption of that resolution?

Senator NEELY. Do you mean to say, or to intimate, that any coal operator is opposing the adoption of that resolution?

Mr. MURRAY. The resolution is under consideration, and they are favorably considering the passage of this resolution, which seeks to destroy the price provisions of the Bituminous Coal Code, with the resultant evil effects it has upon the maintenance of our present wage structure.

Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that Mr. Godfrey M. S. Tait, who is chairman of the board of arbitration of this marketing committee, be requested by this committee to appear before the committee and furnish a complete transcript of the testimony which has been adduced before the board during the hearings held at the Shoreham Hotel this week.

I am making that request in behalf of the United Mine Workers of America.

Mr. W. D. BARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, I am the chairman of the Marketing and Correlating Division of the Northern West Virginia Subdivisional Code Authority; and I would like to present myself a statement in connection with this resolution that has been included in the minutes, or else have Dr. Burke present what I know about it. Senator NEELY. You may make the statement yourself, Mr.. Barrington.

Dr. BURKE. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Barrington is more qualified than I am.

Mr. BARRINGTON. This resolution as stated is not correct. The wording in that resolution has been revised, and the latest revision of that resolution I have in my hand.

Senator NEELY. Will you read the resolution in its revised form, Mr. Barrington?

Mr. BARRINGTON. Possibly you will not want it, Mr. Chairman, in your minutes because of the fact that this resolution has not been agreed upon by the various subdivisions of division no. 1.

Senator NEELY. Inasmuch as the resolution which you say is not correct has been already read into the record, I think the corrected one should appear.

Mr. BARRINGTON. The point is this resolution is still under discussion. It is not official at all, so far as the divisional marketing committee is concerned, of division no. 1. It is not an official document at all, but I would be glad to read what the wording of it is now as submitted to the members of the divisional marketing committee for consideration.

Senator NEELY. It is the opinion of the members of the subcommittee present that that resolution ought to be read into the record; that is, if you wish to take exception to the one that has been read. Mr. BARRINGTON. This resolution reads:

MARCH 1, 1935.

Resolved, That any producer under this Subdivisional Code Authority's jurisdiction who can show that any other producer, agent, or wholesaler is offering a coal, other than railway locomotive fuel, at less than the established code price for said coal on a piece of business which he is now supplying at a legitimate code price or a legitimate code contract price, and that said producer is filing statistical data as required by amendment no. 4 of the code, proving his assertion that he is supplying the coal, may be issued a permit to make reduction from the fair minimum market price so as to retain the particular lot of business. Such permit, when issued, shall show the account, tonnage, and price of the producer receiving such relief, and there shall be published in the Code Authority Bulletin, at once, the name and address of the account and the name of the producer and number of the permit so issued.

This resolution was brought up before the divisional marketing committee of division no. 1.

Senator NEELY. Pardon me. Mr. Barrington, what is the important difference between the resolution which you have read and the one read by Mr. Murray? I notice you substitute the word "piece" for the word "lot" in line 4 of the resolution which Mr. Murray read. Mr. BARRINGTON. That is correct. The other revision, Senator, is in connection with the words "supplying at a legitimate code price." Senator NEELY. The resolution read by Mr. Murray says "supplying at a legitimate price." You insert the word "code" before the word "price."

Mr. BARRINGTON. "Code price, or a legitimate code contract price."

Senator NEELY. "Code contract price."

Mr. BARRINGTON. Senator, what I wanted to bring out particularly in connection with this remark about this resolution is the fact that the various subdivisions of division no. 1 are not in agreement on this resolution being included in any price schedule. The southern subdivision no. 1 and the northern West Virginia subdivision are opposed to the inclusion of this resolution in any price schedule, because of the fact that the divisional marketing committee members were in dis

agreement on this resolution. It by appeal can be brought before the National Coal Board of Arbitration for their decision in the matter. It was brought before the National Coal Board of Arbitration, and this is the National Coal Board of Arbitration's remarks to the divisional marketing committee. Their statement is under March 1, 1935, and reads as follows:

NATIONAL COAL BOARD OF ARBITRATION,

2500 CALVERT STREET, NW. Washington, D. C., March 1, 1935. The board rules that if any subdivision or marketing agency should propose a price schedule containing provisions similar to those contained in the resolution presented to the board, and if after reasonable effort to reach an agreement in respect thereto there is objection on the part of any subdivision or marketing agency then in that event the board will assume jurisdiction of a complaint in respect thereto and will expedite the hearing thereof, as far as possible, consistent with reasonable notice to all interested parties.

GODFREY M. S. TAIT,

The only point I want to make in this connection is that that resolution is under discussion, and there are subdivisions that are opposed to any inclusion of such a resolution in their price schedule.

Senator NEELY. Mr Barrington, I assume from your remarks that you oppose the request made by Mr. Murray.

Mr. BARRINGTON. As evidence that this resolution is an official document as read.

Senator NEELY. It would become official in the event it were adopted, I suppose?

Mr. BARRINGTON. Not yet. It is not even before the board of arbitration at the present time for its decision. It has been referred back to the divisional marketing committee, and it may never come up before the National Coal Board of Arbitration again.

However, we feel that there is a possibility of some clause or a resolution to protect those who are abiding by the code of fair competition in the renewal of their business as against operators, or sales agencies, who are offering their coal in violation of the code of fair competition. Many of us do not believe that this resolution is a proper resolution to avoid or handle the violators of the code of fair competition. We feel that that should be done by enforcement under the rulings of the code of fair competition.

Senator NEELY. In your opinion, are the violators of the provisions of the code numerous?

Mr. BARRINGTON. I would say that they are in a great minority until just recently.

Senator NEELY. Just recently have they become rather numerous? Mr. BARRINGTON. The general impression is that the violations have been increasing.

Senator NEELY. And the violations pertain particularly to reduction of the prices established by the code, do they not?

Mr. BARRINGTON. There are several violations, Senator Neely, which are not under control; that is, we cannot find legislative power

to force these operators to abide by the code of fair competition rulings.

Senator NEELY. That is particularly true in regard to the maintenance of the minimum price structure, is it not?

Mr. BARRINGTON. Yes; that is one of the very important features, and that is that operators will sell their coal at the fair minimum prices as provided in their price schedules; and there are violations by at least a few which tend to lead others in an effort to retain their business also to violate the code. But if we had enforcement of the code of fair competition in this offer for the sale of coal at less than the code price, there would be no motive in presenting such a resolution as I have referred to here before any divisional marketing committee meetings.

Senator NEELY. Mr. Murray, as you are one of the proponents of the measure, and as the proponents will on Monday be given an opportunity to offer surrebuttal evidence, may not the chairman suggest that you, at that time, read into the record the minutes to which you have referred; and it occurs to the chair that that would be the orderly way to take up the record.

Mr. MURRAY. I am apprehensive about this situation, as are the members of the coal producers marketing committee; and we are fearful that the effect of the passage of a resolution of this description might tend to create havoc in the coal fields of the Nation, particularly as it relates to miners' wages.

By the way, I do not have the transcript of this record. Mr. Tait, who is chairman of the Board, has the transcript, which contains a complete discussion of the entire proposition by every member of the marketing committee.

Senator NEELY. The subcommittee will lend both the proponents and opponents all the assistance at its command in the matter of compelling the production of documents or testimony. Mr. Brady, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF S. D. BRADY, JR., MORGANTOWN, W. VA.,
PRESIDENT OF THE OSAGE COAL CO.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is S. D. Brady, Jr., president of the Osage Coal Co., located at Morgantown, W. Va., in the northern West Virginia district. I am also a member of the Northern West Virginia Subdivisional Code Authority. I have a short verbal statement that I wish to make. I endorse the brief as submitted by the Northern West Virginia Subdivisional Coal Association, and I think that under this Guffey bill my own business will be seriously affected.

I have every cent of money that I had invested in my own company, and I have devoted considerable of my time to developing its business and building it up. I produce, approximately, 500,000 tons a year. Under the allocation as set up in this proposition I will lose about 32 percent of my business. Feeling that under the American system that may tend to encourage the small man to build himself into a larger producing unit, I do not see why such a bill should be passed that will penalize newcomers into the coal business; and by "newcomers" I mean the fellows who have come in within the last. 5 years. I mean also that the figures show that all mines that have